Pulaski

Agreed. What was sold elsewhere as crumpets were pikelets in Yorkshire when I lived in Sheffield as a child. FWIW my mother lived in Hull until she married, and "pikelets" is the word she uses.

Rete

From an older American woman, the spelling of Thomas' to show the possessive case is what I was taught in Catholic schools back in the days of the dinosaur.

I've noted the change over the last ten years or so of what is considered the correct way to pluralize a word ending in an s but for my generation it was Thomases. Cannot is the still the way I was taught to spell the word and not today's version of can not. Everything evolves over the ages.

Pulaski

I was also taught that possessive on a single noun ending in an "s" was indicated by "s' ". ..... I am not a woman, nor was I born an American, nor taught at a catholic school, nor indeed a school in the US. There seems to have been a creeping tendency to move to "...s's " to indicate possession of a noun ending in "s".

I am not sure how I would pluralize Thomas if it wasn't to Thomases.

I don't recall ever seeing "can not", but I do see "can't" frequently and I was taught that contractions such as can't, won't, don't, doesn't etc. had no place in narrative writing, except when quoting what someone said.

RoadWarriorFromLP

Thomas was a Brit in New York who had a bakery that sold these things.

Baking Hall of Fame | American Society of Baking

They obviously resemble a crumpet. For whatever reason, Thomas decided to make his own variant.

I am going to guess that he was probably baking bread with the same dough, so he decided to use bread dough instead of making a specific batch of dough for his quasi-crumpets.

He also decided to cook his on both sides instead of just one. Why, I don't know.

Not sure if this is particularly definitive but this is supposed to be a list of the differences between crumpets and English muffins:

What's the Difference? Crumpets Versus English Muffins | The Kitchn

Today, the Thomas' brand is owned by Bimbo, which is a massive Mexican baking conglomerate. If Donald Trump is elected, then he can build a wall to protect us from these Mexican English muffins.

Rete

I've seen can not written this way many times here on BE. I use can't quite often when emailing friends or when I don't want to do something but never when writing 'formally'. I've run across the pluralization of a name, such as Jones, as Joness in novels and it just smacks me upside the head as wrong.

Rete

Didn't know that. Thought it was owned by an Italian.

Will have to rethink which bakery products I purchase in the future.

Nutmegger

Yes, Thomas's and the Thomases are the correct versions!

RoadWarriorFromLP

"Thomases" is the possessive for the plural. This is referring to one specific dude named Thomas, so that would be incorrect.

The "s" following the apostrophe is optional. So Thomas' and Thomas's are both correct.

Former Lancastrian

So if you see 2 moose and 2 mouses what do you say?

RoadWarriorFromLP

"Look! Four meeses!"

Nutmegger

We had got away from the muffins, so were referring to Thomases as just the plural, as in "Did you see that the Thomases have bought a new car?" For the possessive, as in "That is Mr. Thomas's new car," the apostrophe and s is preferred. But for both, it would be a lot simpler to do a work around, and say, "That is the new car the Thomases bought"!

robin1234

With muffins, the only definitive solution would be to buy Freihoffer's or some other brand not ending in 's', but they're just not as good as Thomas' or Thomas's

Nutmegger

Or wait for a visit to the UK, and get the real thing -- be it crumpet, pikelet, or muffin!

RoadWarriorFromLP

While it is clear that you prefer to use an "s" after the apostrophe, that "s" is optional.

Nutmegger

Not just me, The Chicago Manual of Style, too, which I reckon puts me in good company!